Hi Chang! Thanks for the response! Is it ok that because of 1) we would need to include MCTP SrcEID/DstEID in each function of the PLDM_SMBIOS_TRANSFER_PROTOCOL?
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-platforms/blob/06f6274d56422084281886fad447ab117fd0e487/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe.c#L459 ``` EDKII_PLDM_SMBIOS_TRANSFER_PROTOCOL_V1_0 mPldmSmbiosTransferProtocolV10 = { GetSmbiosStructureTableMetaData, SetSmbiosStructureTableMetaData, GetSmbiosStructureTable, SetSmbiosStructureTable, GetSmbiosStructureByType, GetSmbiosStructureByHandle }; ``` I've also send you pull requests with my changes to the edk2/edk2-platforms repos: https://github.com/changab/edk2/pull/1 https://github.com/changab/edk2-platforms/pull/6 If you don't mind I would send patches in this fashion before posting them to the mailing list. So you can review them and provide feedback. Also I wanted to ask if you plan to work on the required changes yourself, or am I on my own from here?) Best regards, Konstantin Aladyshev On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 8:58 AM Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> wrote: > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > Hi Aladyshev, > Here is my response, > > 1. Shouldn't we update the PLDM protocol's 'PldmSubmit' function to receive > 'MctpSrcEID'/'MctpDestEID'. > Yes, I see the use case of EFI shell application. I would like to have the > input parameters similar with MctpSubmitCommand. Use pointers for the given > SEID and DEID, adopt the fix PCD value of the pointer is NULL. > > 2. The 'PldmProtocolCommon' code contains array ofexpected response sizes. > The idea is as an high level PLDM driver, such as SMBIOS, it doesn't have to > handle the full size of PLDM message. It should only care about the response > data belong to it. That's why I added the array to define the PLDM response > size for any PLDM spec. > As the PLDM message and PLDM complete code is in a fixe size. I think we can > remove the array and just adjust the response size in PLDM Protocol driver. > > 3. The 'AdditionalTransferError' is designed to accommodate error codes for > the specific transport or protocol. We don’t have much implementation of > 'AdditionalTransferError' as the entire Manageability needs more practices to > make it more mature. > I suggest we can categorize 'AdditionalTransferError' using the most > significant byte, for example > 0x00 - Common additional transfer error. > 0x80 - KCS transport error > 0x81 - MCTP > ... > 0xC0 - IPMI protocol error > 0xC1 - PLDM protocol error > ... > > How do you think? > Thanks > Abner > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev <aladyshe...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 11:18 PM > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > Cc: disc...@edk2.groups.io; devel@edk2.groups.io > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP over KCS > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > Sorry for many messages today, but I have one more observation. > > > > I think the MCTP code should set specific 'AdditionalTransferError' > > for the caller when it fails on each of the response header checks: > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/5af7ca1555863288bd2887ca465ad07d74b9868e/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtocolCommon. > > c#L464 > > > > But I'm not sure how 'AdditionalTransferError' can be utilized for > > this. Right now the errors are generic for the IPMI/MCTP protocols > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/5af7ca1555863288bd2887ca465ad07d74b9868e/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Include/Library/ManageabilityTransportLib.h#L63 > > Maybe it would be good to reserve some bits for the protocol specific > > errors? What do you think? > > > > Also I don't see anything like 'AdditionalTransferError' in the PLDM > > protocol code. Shouldn't it also support reporting additional error > > information to the user? > > > > I've also created PRs for your edk2/edk2-platforms forks with some > > things that I've found today. > > https://github.com/changab/edk2/pull/1 > > https://github.com/changab/edk2-platforms/pull/6 > > > > Best regards, > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:31 PM Konstantin Aladyshev > > <aladyshe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I was thinking more about it and I think the right solution would be > > > to move these checks to the EDKII_PLDM_SMBIOS_TRANSFER_PROTOCOL > > code > > > (i.e. https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Univ > > ersal/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe.c) > > > > > > Because only the PldmSmbios protocol code should know such information > > > as expected response sizes for its commands. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:19 PM Konstantin Aladyshev > > > <aladyshe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Also I see that the 'PldmProtocolCommon' code contains array of > > > > expected response sizes for every supported PLDM command: > > > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/5af7ca1555863288bd2887ca465ad07d74b9868e/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Common/PldmProtocolCommon. > > c#L24 > > > > > > > > I'm not sure that we should have this, since we don't need to know the > > > > MCTP response size apriori. > > > > This only limits allowed PLDM commands to the supported array: > > > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/5af7ca1555863288bd2887ca465ad07d74b9868e/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Common/PldmProtocolCommon. > > c#L261 > > > > > > > > This means that right now I can't execute my simple 'GetPLDMTypes' > > > > command through the 'PldmSubmit' protocol function. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 12:55 PM Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > <aladyshe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't we update the PLDM protocol's 'PldmSubmit' function to > > > > > receive 'MctpSrcEID'/'MctpDestEID' as incoming parameters? Or maybe > > > > > add some 'PldmInit' function to set those parameters for further PLDM > > > > > communication? > > > > > Because right now the MCTP EIDs are fixed to PCDs with no flexibility > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > platforms/blob/d6e36a151ff8365cdc55a6914cc5e6138d5788dc/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Common/PldmProtocolCommon. > > c#L121 > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 7:03 AM Chang, Abner > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: disc...@edk2.groups.io <disc...@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf > > Of > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 1:57 AM > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP > > over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use > > > > > > > proper > > caution > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is great, and I'm surprised there are some build errors at > > > > > > > > your > > end. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm surprised your compiler didn't catch that since it is all > > > > > > > basic > > > > > > > syntax errors. > > > > > > > I've used your https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > > > > > > platforms/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah I know why, I forget to rebuild the changes of both PEC and MCTP > > EID after I verifying the functionality of IPMI on the new KbcCommonLib.c. > > Yes, I do see the build error now and was fixed at my end. My fault. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you think we just send it to the mailing list for review > > > > > > > > and > > keep > > > > > > > working on other problems based on it.? > > > > > > > > Could you please send the patches out, with you as the author > > > > > > > > and > > I'm the > > > > > > > coauthor? I will review it again on dev mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No problem, I can send a patch to the 'edk2-devel' mailing list. > > > > > > > But before that I think I'll write a test app to check if PLDM > > > > > > > protocols work correctly. > > > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also earlier I've pointed to a fact that 'MctpSourceEndpointId' > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > 'MctpDestinationEndpointId' aren't actually used in the > > > > > > > 'MctpSubmitMessage' function. > > > > > > > EIDs are always taken from the PCDs: > > > > > > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/1c8d0d3fa403b47a34667f7f690add7822163111/Features/ > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtocolCommon. > > > > > > > c#L178 > > > > > > > What can we do about that? > > > > > > Ah yes, we should update the algorithm, it is done here: > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE. You have to update your code > > here: > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/blob/master/PldmMessage/PldmMessage.c > > > > > > And we also need the fix the typo on edk2, > > https://github.com/changab/edk2/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Btw, how long do you think I would take to merge your changes on > > > > > > > openBMC? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So as I've described in the > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master > > > > > > > there are basically 2 approaches for the MCTP stack in OpenBMC: > > > > > > > (1) userspace approach (legacy, shouldn't be really used now) > > > > > > > (2) kernel approach > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is hard to tell if OpenBMC patches for the (1) approach will be > > > > > > > merged. Since I've developed the Linux kernel driver (2) nobody > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > cares about (1). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the (2) there are a couple of OpenBMC patches which I've > > > > > > > helped > > to > > > > > > > develop, but I'm just a coathor in them. So it is hard for me to > > > > > > > tell > > > > > > > when they would be merged. For me it looks like they are mostly > > ready: > > > > > > > 66591: transport: af-mctp: Add pldm_transport_af_mctp_bind() | > > > > > > > https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/libpldm/+/66591 > > > > > > > 63652: pldm: Convert to using libpldm transport APIs | > > > > > > > https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/pldm/+/63652 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the (2) I also need to push the mctp Linux kernel driver > > > > > > > upstream. > > > > > > > Linux kernel development is not what I do every day, so I'm not > > > > > > > sure > > > > > > > how long it would take. But I'm pretty determined to finish the > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > and push my driver upstream. Currently there are some questions > > > > > > > regarding Linux KCS subsystem, so along with the KCS subsystem > > creator > > > > > > > we have to figure out how to rewrite the subsystem correctly. So > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > can take some time. > > > > > > > After the code is pushed to the torvalds/linux, it would be > > > > > > > picked up > > > > > > > by the openbmc/linux automatically. > > > > > > Ok, I got it. Thanks for the detailed information. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 7:12 PM Chang, Abner > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is great, and I'm surprised there are some build errors at > > > > > > > > your > > end. > > > > > > > > How do you think we just send it to the mailing list for review > > > > > > > > and > > keep > > > > > > > working on other problems based on it.? > > > > > > > > Could you please send the patches out, with you as the author > > > > > > > > and > > I'm the > > > > > > > coauthor? I will review it again on dev mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will take a look on kernal change. Btw, how long do you think > > > > > > > > I > > would take > > > > > > > to merge your changes on openBMC? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev <aladyshe...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 11:59:16 PM > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io>; > > > > > > > disc...@edk2.groups.io <disc...@edk2.groups.io> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP > > over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use > > proper > > > > > > > caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Chang! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > There were a couple of trivial compilation errors, but after > > > > > > > > I've > > > > > > > > fixed them everything seems to work fine! > > > > > > > > Just in case I've tested the OpenBMC side with the mctp Linux > > > > > > > > kernel > > > > > > > > driver approach > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master/mctp-kernel) > > > > > > > > The latest kernel patches can be found here: > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231003131505.337-1- > > > > > > > aladyshe...@gmail.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a fix for the build errors that I've found: > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > > > > > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtoc > > > > > > > olCommon.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProto > > > > > > > colCommon.c > > > > > > > > index 79501d27aa..345c6da81a 100644 > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtoc > > > > > > > olCommon.c > > > > > > > > +++ > > > > > > > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProto > > > > > > > colCommon.c > > > > > > > > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ SetupMctpRequestTransportPacket ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > // > > > > > > > > // Generate PEC follow SMBUS 2.0 specification. > > > > > > > > - *MctpKcsTrailer->Pec = HelperManageabilityGenerateCrc8 > > > > > > > > (MCTP_KCS_PACKET_ERROR_CODE_POLY, 0, ThisPackage, > > > > > > > > MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount); > > > > > > > > + MctpKcsTrailer->Pec = HelperManageabilityGenerateCrc8 > > > > > > > > (MCTP_KCS_PACKET_ERROR_CODE_POLY, 0, ThisPackage, > > > > > > > > MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount); > > > > > > > > *PacketBody = (UINT8 *)ThisPackage; > > > > > > > > *PacketBodySize = MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount; > > > > > > > > *PacketTrailer = > > > > > > > (MANAGEABILITY_TRANSPORT_TRAILER)MctpKcsTrailer; > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > > > > > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > > > > > > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > > > > > > index 863b8d471c..247d032b9b 100644 > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > > > > > > +++ > > > > > > > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > > > > > > @@ -79,17 +79,17 @@ MctpSubmitMessage ( > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > // > > > > > > > > - // Chec source EID and destination EDI. > > > > > > > > + // Check source EID and destination EID > > > > > > > > // > > > > > > > > if ((MctpSourceEndpointId >= > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_START_ID) && > > > > > > > > - MctpSourceEndpointId <= > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > > > > > > + (MctpSourceEndpointId <= > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > > > > > > ) { > > > > > > > > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "%a: The value of MCTP source EID (%x) > > is > > > > > > > > reserved.\n", func, MctpSourceEndpointId)); > > > > > > > > return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if ((MctpDestinationEndpointId >= > > > > > > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_START_ID) && > > > > > > > > - MctpDestinationEndpointId <= > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > > > > > > + (MctpDestinationEndpointId <= > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > > > > > > ) { > > > > > > > > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "%a: The value of MCTP destination EID > > (%x) > > > > > > > > is reserved.\n", func, MctpDestinationEndpointId)); > > > > > > > > return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER; > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 2:52 PM Chang, Abner > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > I have updated the change you made and put those code on below > > link, > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > > > > > > > > platforms/commit/1c8d0d3fa403b47a34667f7f690add7822163111 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I combined MCTP over KCS changes and IPMI over KCS > > functionality in > > > > > > > KcsCommonLib.c. I also created > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER as you > > > > > > > suggested. The source EID and destination EID are checked in > > > > > > > MctpSubmitCommand as well. IPMI/KCS functionality is verified and > > works > > > > > > > fine after this change. > > > > > > > > > As I am no able to use the corresponding change you made on > > OpenBMC > > > > > > > site at my end, could you please help to verify my updates on your > > machine? > > > > > > > Let's see how it works. > > > > > > > > > I also consider to migrate the code that generates MCTP over > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > header/trailer from MctpProtocolCommon.c to KcsCommonLib.c, > > maybe after > > > > > > > we verifying PLDM->MCTP->KCS route works well on > > ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev <aladyshe...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 2:18 AM > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via > > MCTP over > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. > > > > > > > > > > Use > > proper > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Chang! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you have time to test libmctp MCTP KCS binding solution? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here are some updates from my end. As I was saying, I was > > working on > > > > > > > > > > the Linux kernel binding solution. > > > > > > > > > > And now I've finished the initial implementation of the > > > > > > > > > > Linux > > kernel > > > > > > > > > > binding driver for the MCTP-over-KCS binding and proposed > > > > > > > > > > all > > the > > > > > > > > > > patches upstream > > > > > > > > > > (https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg4949173.html). > > > > > > > > > > I've also updated instructions in my repo > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM (the guide for the kernel > > binding > > > > > > > > > > solution and all the necessary Linux kernel patches can be > > > > > > > > > > found > > here > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master/mctp-kernel). > > > > > > > > > > So now you can use Linux driver instead of the libmctp > > > > > > > > > > utility on > > the BMC > > > > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple of things that I've noticed in the development > > > > > > > > > > process: > > > > > > > > > > - `MctpSubmitCommand` receives > > > > > > > > > > 'MctpSourceEndpointId'/'MctpDestinationEndpointId' as > > arguments. But > > > > > > > > > > these values aren't actually used. The current code just > > > > > > > > > > uses EIDs > > > > > > > > > > that were set via PCDs > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/d03a60523a6086d200d3eb1e2f25530bf1cb790e/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtocolCommon. > > > > > > > > > > c#L178) > > > > > > > > > > - According to the specification DSP0236 (section 8.2) MCTP > > > > > > > > > > EID > > 0 to 7 > > > > > > > > > > are reserved. It is critical that we do not use them since > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > Linux > > > > > > > > > > kernel subsystem checks that part. So we probably need to > > > > > > > > > > add > > some > > > > > > > > > > check to the `MctpSubmitCommand` that would verify that we > > don't use > > > > > > > > > > reserved EIDs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 5:32 AM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for providing the details, I will take a look at > > > > > > > > > > > your code > > first, > > > > > > > > > > implement it at my end and then response to your question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev <aladyshe...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 8:57 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages > > > > > > > > > > > > via > > MCTP > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External > > > > > > > > > > > > Source. > > Use proper > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Chang! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've finished my initial implementation of the MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > over KCS > > binding. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can find 'edk2-platform' patches and 'openbmc' > > > > > > > > > > > > patches > > along > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > all of the instructions in my repository > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM. I hope you'll be able to > > reproduce > > > > > > > > > > > > everything on your hardware configuration. Feel free to > > > > > > > > > > > > ask > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > questions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also I've sent all the openbmc patches upstream, hope > > > > > > > > > > > > they > > will get > > > > > > > > > > > > accepted soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > As for the 'edk2-platform' patches, right now I don't > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > understand > > > > > > > > > > > > how to write them correctly to keep IPMI over KCS stack > > working. I > > > > > > > > > > > > think here I would need your help. Right now I've > > > > > > > > > > > > commited > > them to > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > `edk2-platforms` fork > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/commit/99a6c98a63b37f955c0d0480149b84fcc3a03f74 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple of questions/notices: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) You've said that we can differentiate MCTP by the > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer > > token, > > > > > > > > > > > > but it is not passed to the 'KcsTransportSendCommand' > > function > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/bb6841e3fd1c60b3f8510b4fc0a380784e05d326/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > > > > > > on.c#L414 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) What function should know about the > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER? > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep in mind that this header includes 'ByteCount' for > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > incoming > > > > > > > > > > > > data size that we need to read. > > > > > > > > > > > > - KcsTransportSendCommand or > > CommonMctpSubmitMessage ? > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTra > > > > > > > > > > > > nsportKcsLib/Common/KcsCommon.c) > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Common/MctpProtocolCommon.c)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As I've said earlier I think it would be good to add > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER to the Mctp.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Not sure if it is a good idea to pass these > > > > > > > > > > > > parameters to the > > > > > > > > > > > > MctpSubmitCommand protocol function: > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > UINT8 MctpType, > > > > > > > > > > > > BOOLEAN RequestDataIntegrityCheck, > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Include/Protocol/MctpPr > > > > > > > > > > > > otocol.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > Shouldn't it be in the `RequestData` directly since it > > > > > > > > > > > > is more of > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > payload than a header for the MCTP? I don't know the > > specification > > > > > > > > > > > > very well, but what if the RequestDataIntegrityCheck > > > > > > > > > > > > would > > be set in > > > > > > > > > > > > the response? Who would need to check the integrity of > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > payload > > > > > > > > > > > > buffer in that case? MCTP library or the code calling > > > > > > > > > > > > the MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > library? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) Haven't tested the PldmProtocol, maybe it also needs > > some > > > > > > > corrections. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to ask any questions about my solution. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right now I'll probably focus on the Linux kernel > > > > > > > > > > > > driver for the > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > over KCS binding. So if you want to finish > > > > > > > > > > > > edk2-platforms > > code based > > > > > > > > > > > > on my patches, feel free to do it. If not, I'll try to > > > > > > > > > > > > get back to it > > > > > > > > > > > > after I finish the Linux kernel driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 8:58 AM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See my answer below, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On > > Behalf > > > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 12:02 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > messages > > via > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Source. > > Use > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I've said there is nothing like "KCS completion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > code" in > > the > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over KCS binding specification > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0254_1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .0.0.pdf). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The response packet should have the same structure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as a > > request. > > > > > > > I.e. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a packet with MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER and > > PEC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently I'm writing "MCTP over KCS" binding for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > OpenBMC > > > > > > > > > > libmctp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > project. So I can send whatever I want, I don't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think my > > output > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be any useful to you. But I've asked this question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > community > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and they also confirmed that the response packet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has the > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > > > structure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://discord.com/channels/775381525260664832/7787906385638850 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 86/1146782595334549554) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now I'm a little bit confused about the > > > > > > > `KcsTransportSendCommand` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > function. It has the following arguments for the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > function > > output: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OUT UINT8 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *ResponseData OPTIONAL, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IN OUT UINT32 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *ResponseDataSize > > OPTIONAL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we include > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > output or not? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the MCTP KCS packet for host->BMC and BMC->host are > > in the > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > structure, then yes, the response data from BMC should > > includes > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER in > > my > > > > > > > opinion, as > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > is defined in MCTP base protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let me explain the implementation for MCTP over KCS > > and what > > > > > > > do we > > > > > > > > > > > > miss now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A. MCTP protocol driver linked with KCS Transport > > > > > > > > > > > > > interface > > library > > > > > > > > > > > > > - In MCTP protocol driver, if the transport > > > > > > > > > > > > > interface is KCS > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP KCS > > transport > > > > > > > header, > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > > is DefBody, NetFunc and ByeCount > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > payload > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP KCS > > transport trailer, > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > > is PEC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above three steps are already implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > PEC is calculated by MCTP protocol driver and > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > verified > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > using the same algorithm in my understanding of spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B. In KCS Transport interface library > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. KCS Transport interface library sends the > > > > > > > > > > > > > transport > > header got > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > TransportToken. Same behavior for IPMI protocol, but > > different > > > > > > > content. > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > Transport interface library doesn't have to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. KCS Transport interface library sends the > > > > > > > > > > > > > payload > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. KCS Transport interface library sends the > > > > > > > > > > > > > transport > > trailer got > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > TransportToken. Same behavior for IPMI protocol, but > > different > > > > > > > content. > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > Transport interface library doesn't have to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above three steps are already implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, if Manageability protocol is MCTP, we > > > > > > > > > > > > > skip reading > > > > > > > responses > > > > > > > > > > > > header (Not implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > For reading response data > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. If the ResponseData and ResponseSize is > > > > > > > > > > > > > valid in the > > given > > > > > > > > > > > > TransportToken, then we read ResponseSize data from KCS. > > (Already > > > > > > > > > > > > implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. if Manageability protocol is MCTP, then > > > > > > > > > > > > > we skip > > reading > > > > > > > responses > > > > > > > > > > > > header again (Not implemented) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now the response is returned to MCTP protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > > driver > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C. In MCTP protocol driver, we expect to get the > > > > > > > > > > > > > whole > > MCTP over > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > packet response, that includes DefBody, NetFunc and > > ByeCount, > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > message and PEC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. MCTP protocol driver verifies the > > > > > > > > > > > > > returned PEC with > > the > > > > > > > payload. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Strip out DefBody, NetFunc, ByeCount and > > > > > > > > > > > > > PEC and > > then > > > > > > > returns it > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > upper layer (e.g., MCTP transport interface library). > > > > > > > > > > > > Returns > > only > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > Transport header and MCTP packet payload as it shows in > > MCTP base > > > > > > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > D. In MCTP transport interface library, we can strip > > > > > > > > > > > > > out > > MCTP > > > > > > > transport > > > > > > > > > > > > header and then return it to upper layer (e.g., PLDM > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol > > driver). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > E. In PLDM protocol driver, > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. we verify the Message Integrity Check if > > > > > > > > > > > > > the Message > > Type > > > > > > > > > > requests it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. we can remove MCTP message type then > > > > > > > > > > > > > return it to > > upper > > > > > > > layer > > > > > > > > > > (e.g., > > > > > > > > > > > > PLDM SMBIOS transfer) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We didn’t implement BMC->Host in step C, D and E as > > > > > > > > > > > > > our > > current > > > > > > > > > > demand is > > > > > > > > > > > > to send the SMBIOS table to BMC, which doesn't require > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > response > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > if I > > > > > > > > > > > > am not wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know if it is problematic in the above process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 6:52 PM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But wait, wee my another comment below, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 11:42 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; aladyshe...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM > > messages via > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io > > <devel@edk2.groups.io> On > > > > > > > Behalf > > > > > > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 10:57 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: disc...@edk2.groups.io; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM > > messages via > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > External > > Source. > > > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I don see what is the response header for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > KCS in spec > > > > > > > > > > though, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mention the KCS response?). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The spec doesn't explicitly mention that the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > format of > > a send > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > response packets differ. So I assume it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the same > > and it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described at the "Figure 1 – MCTP over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Packet > > Format" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0254_1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .0.0.pdf) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore the format of a response would look > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > like > > this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Include/Library/Managea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bilityTransportMctpLib.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Include/Industry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Standard/Mctp.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Include/Industry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Standard/Mctp.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < response data> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you see the KCS response from BMC? You > > probably > > > > > > > right as > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > header and trailer are labeled in different > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colors 😊. > > Could you > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the debug message to capture it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PEC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Probably we need to define > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER > > defined but no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER as it is > > hardcoded to one > > > > > > > > > > byte. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the KCS response is PEC, then yes, we can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > create > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER for KCS > > transport > > > > > > > interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the implementation, PEC is calculated in MCTP > > protocol and > > > > > > > send > > > > > > > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS as the KCS packet trailer. So, when we send the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > request > > > > > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS, KCS shouldn't respond the PEC to upper stack, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > right? > > I still > > > > > > > think > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > response should be the KCS completion code. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > debug > > message > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > end may help to clarify this as your BMC has the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > implementation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So in the "KcsTransportSendCommand" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/14553d31c72afa7289f6a2555b6e91f4f715a05a/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on.c#L414) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we can check if we transfer is MCTP (based on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "TransportToken->ManagebilityProtocolSpecification > > == > > > > > > > MCTP" like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you've suggested) and handle response > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But which headers should we check in this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > function? > > Only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER/MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, only check header and trailer for transport > > interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What about > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > check them here as well? Or do we need to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > check > > them > > > > > > > > > > somewhere > > > > > > > > > > > > > > upper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the call stack? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We should leave this to MCTP protocol driver as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this is > > belong > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > layer, the upper layer stack. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 7:59 AM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev > > <aladyshe...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 11:09 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: disc...@edk2.groups.io; > > devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > via > > MCTP > > > > > > > over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > External > > Source. > > > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've started to implement MCTP over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > binding > > for the > > > > > > > > > > libmctp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp) and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > test > > it with > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > current > > > > > > > > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was able successfully send the MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > packet to > > the BMC, > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm having some troubles with receiving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > answer back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think I've found some bug in the > > > > > > > > > > `KcsTransportSendCommand` > > > > > > > > > > > > code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After it sends data over KCS in expects a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > responce > > starting > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'IPMI_KCS_RESPONSE_HEADER' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/14553d31c72afa7289f6a2555b6e91f4f715a05a/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on.c#L476 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't it wrong, assuming that the right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > header in > > case of > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be 'MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER' ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'IpmiHelperCheckCompletionCode' > > check after > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > receive is also not relevant for the MCTP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is something I don’t really sure as I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't verify > > the > > > > > > > response > > > > > > > > > > > > > > payload > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because our BMC doesn't have the code to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > handle > > MCTP over > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > command. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However it is appreciated if community can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > help to > > verify this. > > > > > > > As I > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remember, I can see the return KCS status is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0xC1, > > the invalid > > > > > > > > > > > > command. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think if we do a MCTP over KCS, the first > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > response is > > still KCS > > > > > > > > > > response > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > header. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not what do you see on the BCM it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > support > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS? If > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so, then I would like to have your help to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct this > > code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since 'ManageabilityTransportKcsLib' can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be used > > both for > > > > > > > IPMI > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP, how should we deal with this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If KcsCommon.c, we can have different code > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > path > > for the > > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GUID. e.g., if (TransportToken- > > > > > > > >ManagebilityProtocolSpecification > > > > > > > > > > == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then skip reading the KCS_REPOSNSE_HEADER or > > to read > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_RESPONSE_HEADER (I don see what is the > > response > > > > > > > header > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS in spec though, does it mention the KCS > > response?). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 5:18 AM Chang, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please see my answers inline. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > <disc...@edk2.groups.io> > > > > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Behalf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 1:54 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: disc...@edk2.groups.io; > > devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-discuss] PLDM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > messages > > via MCTP > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > an > > External > > > > > > > Source. > > > > > > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > links, or > > > > > > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the answer! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was a little bit confused about the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part, that > > in the > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > package > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > actually need to provide different > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > library > > > > > > > implementations > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > same 'ManageabilityTransportLib', > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for > > the > > > > > > > > > > clarification! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your DSC example should go > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > into the > > package > > > > > > > > > > > > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, this is a good idea. I will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > update it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for me, I'm working with the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OpenBMC > > distribution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > my goal > > > > > > > is to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from the BIOS to the BMC via > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP/PLDM. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently there is no solution for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the MCTP > > over KCS > > > > > > > binding > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Linux, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so I need to add this support: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - either to the MCTP userspace library > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [old > > > > > > > OpenBMC > > > > > > > > > > way, > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > easier] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - or to the MCTP kernel binding > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/drivers/net/mctp) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [modern mctp Linux driver approach] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both don't sound like an easy task, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so can I > > ask, what > > > > > > > MC > > > > > > > > > > (i.e. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management controller) device and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > firmware > > do you > > > > > > > use on > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > side of the MCTP KCS transmissions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We use OpenBMC as well, but as you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mention > > there are > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > missing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pieces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to fully support manageability between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > host and > > BMC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We don’t have code to handle MCTP IPMI > > either, the > > > > > > > edk2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > provides the framework while MCTP/PLDM/KCS > > > > > > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > provides > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sample other than IPMI/KCS to prove the > > flexibility of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, MCTP over KCS is not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported in our > > BMC > > > > > > > > > > firmware > > > > > > > > > > > > yet, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BMC just returns the invalid command. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, > > the > > > > > > > transport > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > framework > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has been verified to make sure the > > implementation works > > > > > > > fine > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > expect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need help from community to provide > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > manageability > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > protocols > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transport interface libraries to this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You've also mentioned PLDM SMBIOS, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > isn't it > > covered > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmSmbiosTr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ansferDxe/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah hah, yes I forget I upstream it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please just feel free to send patch to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > make more > > > > > > > > > > functionalities to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 7:26 PM Chang, > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <abner.ch...@amd.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We use library class to specify the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > desire > > transport > > > > > > > > > > interface > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management protocol, such as MCTP, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PLDM > > and IPMI. > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > flexibly support any transport > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interface for the > > > > > > > management > > > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the example of using > > ManageabilityPkg, which > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > PLDM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over KCS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/IpmiProtocol/Dxe/IpmiProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <LibraryClasses> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <LibraryClasses> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Dxe/PldmProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <LibraryClasses> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tMctpLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you can implement > > ManageabilityTransport library > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > industry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > standard or proprietary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implementation for > > the specific > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, We do have PLDM SMBIOS over > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > upstream yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hope this information helps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: disc...@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > <disc...@edk2.groups.io> > > > > > > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7:00 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <disc...@edk2.groups.io>; > > > > > > > > > > > > devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [edk2-discuss] PLDM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > messages via > > MCTP > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from an > > External > > > > > > > > > > Source. > > > > > > > > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clicking links, > > or > > > > > > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm trying to build > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `ManageabilityPkg` from > > the > > > > > > > edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > repo to issue PLDM messages via > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > over KCS. > > > > > > > Is it > > > > > > > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the current code? I see all the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > building > > blocks, but > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > trouble > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > putting it all together. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main question that bothers me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is what > > > > > > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `ManageabilityTransportLib`? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By default it is set to dummy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `BaseManageabilityTransportNull.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/ManageabilityPkg.dsc). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On one case to get PLDM via MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it looks > > that I > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <...>/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nsportMctpLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But on the other case if I want > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP over > > KCS I > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > > > it to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <...>/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nsportKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the right way to resolve > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are no platforms in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > repo that > > actually > > > > > > > > > > implement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PLDM/MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functionality, so there is no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > example that I > > can use > > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#109585): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109585 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/100897530/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
